Alabama Death Row inmate Anthony Ray Hinton could get new trial

MONTGOMERY | An inmate who has been on Alabama's Death Row for 28 years might get a new trial after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that his trial counsel was inadequate.

By Kim ChandlerThe Associated Press

MONTGOMERY | An inmate who has been on Alabama's Death Row for 28 years might get a new trial after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that his trial counsel was inadequate.

The court issued an opinion Monday saying that Anthony Ray Hinton had "constitutionally deficient" counsel at his trial. The court cited the defense lawyer's failure to know that funds were available to hire a better ballistics expert to help rebut crucial prosecution evidence. The Supreme Court sent the case back to the state court to determine if Hinton should get a new trial.

Hinton was charged with two 1985 murders that occurred during separate robberies of fast-food restaurants in the Birmingham area. Prosecutors linked Hinton to the murders through a .38-caliber revolver found at his house.

The Alabama Department of Forensic Sciences concluded that the four bullets fired during the robberies, and another two from a similar robbery-shooting at a Quincy's restaurant in Bessemer, had all been fired from a revolver found at Hinton's home.

Hinton's defense lawyer wrongly thought he had only $1,000 to hire a ballistics expert to try to rebut the prosecution evidence, according the court opinion. Hinton's lawyer hired the only person willing to take the job at that price even though he had concerns about the expert's credentials.

"Hinton's attorney knew that he needed more funding to present an effective defense, yet he failed to make even the cursory investigation of the state statute providing for defense funding for indigent defendants that would have revealed to him that he could receive reimbursement not just for $1,000 but for "any expenses reasonably incurred," the court wrote.

The trial witness testified the tool marks of the revolver had been corroded away so that it was impossible to say whether a particular bullet had been fired from that gun. However, the witness, a civil engineer who admitted he needed help operating the lab microscope, was discredited during the trial by prosecutors because of his lack of credentials.

During his appeal, Hinton's legal team produced three new experts, including one who had worked at the Federal Bureau of Investigation's forensics laboratory, who determined there was no evidence to support the state's claim that bullets matched Hinton's weapon.

Lawyers for the state of Alabama argued that Hinton was not hurt at trial because the trial witness said all that Hinton could have hoped: that the bullets used in the crimes could not have been fired from Hinton's revolver.

However, the Supreme Court said Hinton deserves a new trial, "if there is a reasonable probability that Hinton's attorney would have hired an expert who would have instilled in the jury a reasonable doubt as to Hinton's guilt had the attorney known that the statutory funding limit had been lifted."